Hodad

Holy crap. It takes some next-level lickspittle skills to see in black and white that the guy has been deliberately -and with full knowledge and intention- lying to you for years and then call him a paragon of virtue. Super sub to Carlson's rescue!

Sure it's very well established. I'm sure that's why you can't produce any evidence to support that claim. And again, parts of the Steele dossier have been confirmed, It's so well established that John Durham explicitly stated in the Danchenko indictment that the Clinton campaign didn’t direct, and wasn’t aware of, Dolan’s activities regarding the dossier.? Sure. The Russians didn't want the information from Manafort. The agent just delivered it to the Kremlin for shites and giggles. You're plumbing new depths here. You apparently don't care how dumb you look in service of your MAGA god. No sacrifice is too great! No, it's not. You are lying. Again. That why you refuse to support your arguments with evidence.

Boy, between all the finger pointing and hand waving you're at serious risk of carpal tunnel, "Kiddo." 1. I'm taking this post as your admission that you cannot support your claims regarding Clinton collusion with the Russians. Her campaign hired someone, who hired someone, who hired someone who leveraged Russian intelligence assets to create a Trump dossier that was at least partially accurate. You say that counts as collusion, lol? Contrast that with Trump's campaign chair directly feeding their polling and strategy into the Russian election interference effort. Which is totally kosher? And you have the unmitigated gall to try and call me hypocritical?? 2. Collusion is not necessarily illegal. It's not a legal term. But the Trump campaign certainly engaged in a 2-way exchange of benefit. FFS, they gave their targeting and strategy info to the Russians who were running the pro-Trump interference campaign. This is, apparently, cool with you. As a Canadian, I don't suppose you need to have any loyalty to the United States, but most Americans think that it's pretty farked up to enable and amplify Russian interference in the US election.

Sounds like pure fiction (or FOX news). I don't recall any indication that Clinton talked to Steele, let alone to the Russians. A law firm working for her campaign hired a Washington, D.C. political research outfit that was being hired by Republicans and Democrats. Any chance you can back up this claim? That's incorrect, and the Mueller report was just the first report and by Mueller's own words did not exonerate Trump. It has since been confirmed by Senate and Treasury reports that Trump's campaign chair met with a Russian intelligence officer (who was involved in the Russian election interference effort) to share proprietary polling data and campaign strategy info--which was then delivered to the Kremlin and presumably used to target and influence Americans. And more. The Trump-Russia collusion is a verified fact. You can cover your eyes and ears as much as you like, but it happened and is part of the historical record.

Yes, I absolutely would have preferred that a non-story be, not so much suppressed, but left alone as a non-story. What kind of weirdo thinks that the head of the FBI should be holding press conferences about non-stories on the eve of a presidential election? And the only thing different about 2020 is that people were properly cautious about the Hunter Biden laptop story. All this whining about suppression when we're talking about a couple of days of being careful and responsible. It's insane the there are people who think the media (or anyone else) should have gone all in on an incredibly sketchy story from the NYP. What a world they imagine, where elections are primarily driven not by facts, but by whichever side can made the most outrageous allegations in October and ask people to vote before any such allegations can be verified.

No, the moral of the story is that the head of the FBI shouldn't hold a press conference until he's confirmed that he has something press-worthy to say. That goes for anyone else. Just basic responsible behavior. Comey was more worried about himself than he was worried about tilting the election, and America paid the price for it. Lesson learned for 2020.

He's not afraid of lying. He's just afraid that technology can do it so much faster that it will "take his job."

That's crap. Comey felt the "need" to announce just before the election that they had found more potentially damning emails on Anthony Weiners laptop. But it turns out they were just the same emails that had already been investigated. Too late. Damage done.

You are incorrect. They can help to prevent infection. They can help to prevent illness. They can mitigate symptoms and risks. There is a flu vaccine every year aimed specifically at reducing hospitalization and death among the infected. You don't get to redefine words for the sake of political convenience.

"AP called the 2016 election for Donald Trump at 2:30 a.m. Wednesday, and Clinton called Trump to congratulate him about 10 minutes later."

False. Plainly false. Dishonest as always.

Do you have trouble reading. Again, the distinction is that Clinton and co NEVER impugned the integrity and security of the electoral process. She never tried to convince Americans that their votes don't count or that they can't trust election results. You fail.

Provide the quote, man up or weasel out. 3 options.

Okay. Please quote even a single instance in which Clinton claimed election fraud or impugned the security of the voting process. I won't hold my breath. And based on past experience, I also don't think you will have the backbone to admit you were wrong when you come up empty. Clinton did decry some of the foul play during the campaign--Comey's unnecessary October surprise, voter suppression efforts, and the Russian interference (which the Trump campaign aided) but she never undermined the integrity of the electoral process. That claim is a lie.

The numbers show, clearly and indisputably, that vaccinated people who contract COVID are dramatically less likely to be hospitalized and dramatically less likely to die. Your numbers may be right but you're not looking at the right numbers. It's as simple as that. Any given individuals odds are much better with the vax.

This is a lie. Clinton never claimed election fraud or in any way undermined faith in the election system. Her version of "stolen" is that she got farked over by Comey. which is true.

Jeebus. You'the like a bullshit factory, mass producing the same crap posts months after month. Do you have macros set up? As always, a mix of half-truths, lies and misinformation, and most debunked many times over. But full points for consistency. ?

It's not just the pandemic with him. It's vaccines in general. Like full on, Jenny McCarthy crazy. Hasb been for many years. It's about the only thing he's known for publicly. Well, that and the name.

I can't stand listening to this buffoon any longer. Just go away. Preferably to prison. I'm sure we're going to round up the homeless and ship them to Mexico where they'll be enlisted as forced labor to build a border wall that Mexico will pay for.

Nobody is "silencing" him. FOX is lying to you. His candidacy is well publicized. Anyone anywhere can read about his anti-vax nutball views. He's just a distraction riding on a famous name. He's getting all the coverage he deserves.

That is definitely NOT the only explanation. People are still tuning in because in a world full of real news, FOX viewers still, as always, love hearing coverage designed solely to confirm their narrow biases. FOX never was a source for quality journalism. It was never intended to be anything more than lucrative infotainment. They hire personalities instead of journalists, their award shelf is bare, but the revenue is real and that's all that matters to them.

Aww. I wish Dominion had held out to give the bastards a taste of their own medicine. Watching Fox people say terrible (and finally true) things about Fox would have been so much fun.

Close. It really seems to be that transgender people shouldn't be allowed.

Can you imagine being such a deeply insecure loser that a company adding one trans influencer (out of dozens if not hundreds) to their roster, that it would deeply affect your brand affinity? Most people's identities and affections just aren't that fragile. Nah, this is just loud noise from the culture warriors. And if the conservative America is really this fragile I'm going to start a fund to have Mulvaney endorse AR-15s.

Personally, I think this whole story is silly. A case of post hoc ergo propter hoc. To believe it deliberate is to imagine, implausibly, that people care enough about a sponsored social media post from a little-known trans influencer is enough to get people to change their beer of choice or their investment strategy in a blue chip company. Are bud light drinkers so transphobic that this sponsorship will induce then to switch beers? Not at scale. Are InBev investors so transphobic that they will dump stock over a post - or do they believe Bud Light drinkers are so transphobic that they will switch brands over this? Not at scale. No this is just a stock blip that is being politicized by the transphobic culture warriors.